Would Julius Caesar have been a good emperor?

Would Julius Caesar have been a good emperor?

Julius Caesar can be considered both a good and bad leader. Caesar’s ability to rise through the ranks quickly and to command armies at such a young age are good examples of his natural leadership abilities. While dictator, Caesar continued to improve Rome by overhauling its tax system and improving the calendar.

Did Julius Caesar need to be assassinated?

Caesar was killed for three reasons: First, the conspirators wanted to halt his power growth. Second, they tried to prevent him from becoming king and destroying the Roman Republic. Finally, some were motivated by basic human emotions – personal vengeance.

READ ALSO:   How can I move without bringing fleas?

Was killing Julius Caesar a good thing?

From a political standpoint, the assassination of Julius Caesar was a bad idea because ultimately it accomplished nothing. After Caesar’s murder, civil war broke out between the forces of Brutus and Cassius and those of Antony and Octavius.

What good things did Julius Caesar do?

Julius Caesar was a renowned general, politician and scholar in ancient Rome who conquered the vast region of Gaul and helped initiate the end of the Roman Republic when he became dictator of the Roman Empire.

Who is the most evil Roman emperor?

Nero is perhaps the best known of the worst emperors, having allowed his wife and mother to rule for him and then stepping out from their shadows and ultimately having them, and others, murdered. But his transgressions go far beyond just that; he was accused of sexual perversions and the murder of many Roman citizens.

How did Julius Caesar lose power?

Other stabbers followed suit. One by one, several members of the Senate took turns stabbing Julius Caesar (100-44 B.C.E.), the dictator of the entire Roman Empire.

READ ALSO:   Does Java have a GIL?

What was Caesar’s next big step after his death?

Caesar’s next big step was to invade Parthia. He had been planning this invasion for a while and had the legions ready to go. In fact, when he died he was only days away from starting the campaign. This begs the first question- how would this have gone and would it alter Parthian/Roman relations?

How would Caesar have beaten Parthia?

Caesar would have likely beaten Parthia and pretty badly. As powerful as Parthia was they were a long way from the might of Rome. Parthia had gotten the best of Crassus but Crassus was a foolhardy general who lacked patience, discipline, and wavered between overaggressiveness and irresponsible inaction. Crassus lost because he was an idiot.

What would have been Caesar’s retaliation for the assassination of Caesar?

In that case, Caesar’s retaliation would have been swift, with suspected assassins arrested, tried and executed. Another scenario was that, had the attack still occurred, Caesar’s co-consul Mark Antony could have intervened, instead of being distracted by one of the conspirators, Trebonius.

READ ALSO:   Can Rafale carry Brahmos missile?

How long did Caesar’s campaign against Dacia last?

Caesar’s attention would quickly have turned to his planned three-year military campaign against Dacia (in the Balkans) and Parthia (roughly, modern-day Iraq and Iran). He had arranged to depart just a few days after the Ides of March, first for Greece to meet the huge force already in training.